About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
for being had largely disappeared. if you think about every one of america's older, colder cities, they were all part of solving a transportation problem. they were all nodes on a transportation network. if you go back to 1816, we as americans sat on the edge of an enormously wealthy continent that was virtually inaccessible. in 1816 it cost as much to move goods 30 miles over land as it did to ship them across the entire atlantic ocean. it was so expensive to get goods in. over the course of the 19th century, we've built an amazing network. we built canals like the erie and illinois and michigan canals, railroads atticaals, and cities grew up. at buffalo, the western terminus of the erie canal. the oldest cities were typically where the river meets the sea, like boston and new york, but every one of america's 20 largest cities was on a major waterway. chicago was a future that was made it the linchpin of a watery arc that went from new york to new orleans. and industries grew up around these transportation hubs. chicago's most famous is, of course, its stockyards, and that's what you're loo
relationships with city governments to the point where there is a large regulatory regime in most cities around taxis. in many cases you have regulators who feel their job is to protect the taxi industry. i had one regulator in new york refer to the taxi industry as their customer. so what happens then is that once it goes into that protection mode, innovation becomes very difficult. it may be why in so many cities that innovation around taxi around transportation is so gummed up. the rig heaters who are supposed to crack the whip end up becoming the protectors. even though it's hard, uber is completely legal, in the cities that we're rolling out and there are cities that we can't roll out where we're like miami and vegas we can't roll out. there is that protection mechanism that makes it particularly controversial. >> so you say you're legal but a lot of these cities suggest otherwise. their regulators are sending out crease and desist orders almost on a daily base. impounding cars in washington, d.c. at one point. they're not allowing this technology to take shape. these guys are starting to
festivals' columbus, ohio they used the money to buy an underwater machinery. host: and in the kansas city, they purchased in bomb detection -- a bomb detection robots despite already having two. it sat largely unused and was brought back on line are high schoolers. let's go to our first caller. from the breezy and appeared -- from louisiana. caller: the u.s. territories, do they applied to them guest: they apply to all of federated territories as well. in some areas, there are statutory minimum amounts that have to be provided to those territories. host: if you like to join the conversation and talked to david maurer about a homeland security grants to states, here are the numbers to call. what formula did the grant programs follow went looking to get out the money? what do they have to do? guest: it varies from program to program, but generally speaking, as a first cut, dhs takes into consideration the risk. in other words, it wants to provide the money more toward portions of the country where there is a greater risk of attack or natural disaster. secondly, we look at capabilities. how
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3